El-Mouelhy v QSociety of Australia Inc (No 3) [2015] NSWSC 1069

El-Mouelhy v QSociety of Australia Inc (No 3) [2015] NSWSC 1069

Imputations that do not differ substantively from others must be pleaded alternatively under r 14.30, and imputations must be pleaded with sufficient specificity. Certain imprecise or unclear imputations were struck out, while others regarding grounds to suspect provision of financial support to extremist organisations, although broadly stated, may be left for the jury's consideration.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 August 2015
Procedural Posture
Defamation / Interlocutory Application on Pleadings
Outcome
Several imputations struck out; some objections upheld; certain imputations to proceed to the jury.
Legal Topics
['imputations' 'capacity to Convey Defamatory Meaning' 'pleadings Specificity' 'proliferation of Imputations' 'jury Determination of Imputations']
['defamation' 'civil Procedure'] ['imputations' 'capacity to Convey Defamatory Meaning' 'pleadings Specificity' 'proliferation of Imputations' 'jury Determination of Imputations']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Defamation / Interlocutory Application on Pleadings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether certain pleaded imputations differ in substance as required by r 14.30 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW)' 'Whether particular imputations are sufficiently precise and capable of being defamatory' 'Whether imputations are reasonably capable of being conveyed by the matters complained of']

Ratio Decidendi

Imputations that do not differ substantively from others must be pleaded alternatively under r 14.30, and imputations must be pleaded with sufficient specificity. Certain imprecise or unclear imputations were struck out, while others regarding grounds to suspect provision of financial support to extremist organisations, although broadly stated, may be left for the jury's consideration.

Court Disposition

Several imputations struck out; some objections upheld; certain imputations to proceed to the jury.

Orders

  • ['Imputation 16(c) and 16(d) may be pleaded only in the alternative.' 'Imputation 16(e), 16(e)(a), 25(b), 25(c), 25(d) are struck out as bad in form or imprecise.' 'Imputations 16(h), 16(h)(a), 25(g), and 25(h) may proceed to the jury.']